Boy With Violin Painting

You can find few other variations of the image online so I guess if not factory, a commercial type of artwork?

 

Not even good enough to be factory art. If you weren't using a digital camera, I'd say it was a waste of film. If you know, or at least suspect, all these paintings are junk why do you keep posting them?

 

I get the impression that your are only into high end art and everything else is junk to you.
Not good enough to be a factory painting. Hm, interesting statement but obviously it is some kind of mass produced piece.
If I suspect something it does mean that I know it for sure and would like to hear other opinions.
Well, mostly productive opinions, not quite like the one above.
If you suspect that my posts are about junk art, why reading and replying to them?
No bad feelings, I've hold myself from answering to your comments before but decided to do it this time. But I also value your comments in other cases.
Peace out!

 

My apologies. The painting is still lousy but a personal attack was unwarranted.

 

It's all good. I just think it is a bit too much to call any kind of art junk, even done by Chinese factory worker ( by the way they can be really good in copies).
I guess the painting was never meant to be a masterpiece but just an affordable piece for people who are into impressionism.
I bought it cheap, hope to sell it for profit and that's it. No big expectations. Not everyone can spend a good amount of money for better quality art.

 

Ah, but isn't it also a mistake to assume that just because someone has smooshed some paint on canvas that the result is automatically art? Sometimes a smoosh is just a smoosh! I would personally prefer to own a worthless reproduction of a great piece of art than a lousy painting. While taste is indeed subjective, look at the violin...that is not the product of someone who knows how to draw or paint.

In any event, I wish you an enjoyable evening.

 

I am a bit surprised by the way of your thinking. In my opinion art is how the artist see or feel things not how they look in reallity. I agree there are certain things in an art piece that can give an idea of how well trained an artist is but still, depends on the style, technique etc. You can draw the violin in the shape of a watermelon and still be an appealing piece. I am not defending the painting, just opposing your general view on the matter.

 

I'm fairly certain that whoever this particular "artist" is/was, he/she would be no better at depicting a watermelon than a violin. I'm a big fan of abstract and non representational art so not every thing needs to look "real". I simply believe that there is a certain skill level required to elevate shmooshes to art. Just because you or I might not be able to paint a child playing a violin doesn't mean that anyone who can is automatically an artist. Bob Ross proved that pretty much anyone can apply paint to canvas. Despite his fame, I wouldn't want to own or look at one of his paintings.

 

Well, that's a good answer
Hope someone will like it and buy it. I've sold a lot of art by amateurs, not listed artists, not signed etc.. Small profits but still something.

 

I don't consider factory painters artists. They are technicians. They are technically perfect, but there is no emotion in the image. I'm with Mark on this. Daubing paint on a canvas does not an artist make. I would suspect that even though this has a recognizable name, the person who painted it was not named Thompson.

 

Do you still have this painting?

 

Art is in the soul of the painter and in the eye of the beholder. Although not exactly my cup of tea some will find it to THEIR taste. I'm with Kard on this, ... Joy.

 

Yes, taste is up to the viewer, but if you are asking about a painting here, it usually means you want to get a valuation to try and sell it and all we are saying is that this type of generic art isn't usually worth much in the marketplace.

 

Yes Mango, still have it.